Single-storey rear extension at 76 Hales Crescent, Smethwick

What was proposed

The application sought to retain a single-storey rear extension containing a lounge, shower room and utility area.

“DC/25/71049 Application Description Retention of single storey rear extension. Application Received 23 September 2025 Application Address 76 Hales Crescent, Smethwick B67 6QS Report Author…”

“The application is for the retention of a single storey rear extension measuring 4.2 metres in length (projection from the original rear elevation) by 6 metres in width. The extension has been built with a flat roof to a height of 2.8 metres…”

Officer report

The site and other works

The property is a semi-detached home in a mainly residential area, and other building works were outside this application.

“The Application Site 5.1 The application property is a semi-detached dwellinghouse situated on the southeastern side of Hales Crescent, Smethwick. The character of the surrounding area is predominantly residential in nature. Planning History A full list of the planning history is provided below: DC/21/65754 Proposed dormer window to rear. Grant Permission subject to external materials condition. August 2021 ENF/25/12822 Outbuilding to rear. Pending Consideration…”

“The application property is council-owned, and the applicant has carried out other building works without the consent of the housing or planning. These works include window replacement, a porch and canopy and an outbuilding. These elements do not form part of this planning application and investigation by the council’s housing team is ongoing.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval with conditions because the design, scale and effect on neighbouring occupiers were considered acceptable.

“Application Summary 1.1 The application is being reported to Planning Committee because three material planning objections have been received. To assist members with site context, a link to Google Maps is provided below: Hales Crescent, Smethwick 2. Recommendations That planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions relating to:”

“Reasons for the recommendation and conditions The proposed development would be acceptable because it accords with design policy, has no significant impact on the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties and the design and scale are appropriate to the existing property and the surrounding area.”

Officer report

Main planning issues

The assessment considered design, garden space, light, outlook, privacy, and noise and dust from construction.

“Key Considerations 4.1 The site is not allocated in the development plan. Material planning considerations (MPCs) are matters that can and should be taken into account when making planning decisions. By law, planning decisions should be made in accordance with the development plan unless MPCs indicate otherwise. This means that if enough MPCs weigh in favour of a development, it should be approved even if it conflicts with a local planning policy.”

“The material planning considerations which are relevant to this application are: • Government policy (NPPF) • Amenity – loss of light, outlook, privacy • Design – external materials; loss of garden amenity space • Environmental concerns – noise and dust from the construction works…”

Officer report

Objections and consultation

One objection and a 29-signature petition raised concerns about construction nuisance, materials, unauthorised works and garden space.

“The application has been publicised by four neighbour notification letters. One objection and a 29-signature petition have been received and are summarised below: i) Noise and dust from the construction works; ii) Design/external materials; iii) Unauthorised building works (including, window replacement, porch/canopy and an outbuilding); and iii) Loss of garden amenity space.”

“Non-material objections concerning drainage and boundary issues have also been raised.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant’s representative addressed construction standards and compliance, while an objector raised safety, size, appearance and enforcement concerns.

Members’ concerns

Members were told that construction defects would be dealt with under Building Regulations and that planning matters had to guide the decision.

“Following concerns by members, it was confirmed that any defects or issues with the construction of the structures would be addressed under Building…”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee refused retention of the rear extension because it was overbearing, out of character and caused overlooking of neighbouring properties.

“Resolved that Planning Application DC/25/71049 – 76 Hales Crescent, Smethwick B67 6QS (Retention of single storey rear extension.) is refused on the grounds of :-”

“I) overbearing in nature; II) out of character with the area; III) overlooking of neighbouring properties.”

Minutes